Falk was born into an assimilationist New York Jewish family which all but repudiated the ethnic side of Jewishness.[2] Defining himself as "an American Jew", he says that having an outsider status, with a sense of not belonging, may have influenced his later role as a critic of American foreign policy.[2][7][8] His being Jewish signifies above all for Falk,'to be preoccupied with overcoming injustice and thirsting for justice in the world, and that means being respectful toward other peoples regardless of their nationality or religion, and empathetic in the face of human suffering whoever and wherever victimization is encountered.'[8]

Falk is a critic of the Westphalian system of nation states, which he argues must be transcended by a more international institution to control the resort to force by nations,[2] as the world moves towards a global ethos in which states renounce their boundary-obsessed territorialism in exchange for a regime of consensually negotiated aims, in which national leaders must be subject to accountability.[13] With regard to specific geopolitical situations, he has published a number of books and essays analyzing the ideological aspects of the American Human Rights Debate,[14] the legality of the Vietnam War and other military operations. With regard to the 2003 invasion of Iraq, he wrote that it is "inescapable that an objective observer would reach the conclusion that this Iraq War is a war of aggression, and as such, that it amounts to a Crime against Peace of the sort for which surviving German leaders were indicted, prosecuted and punished at the Nuremberg trials conducted shortly after the Second World War."[15]

Falk's engagement with politics began at Ohio State University, where in the 1960s as a member of the faculty of law he was a witness to racism targeted at black students. His move to Princeton University, where the teaching of law was linked to politics, international relations and other social sciences allowed Falk to integrate his professional expertise in international law with his ethical and political values. Falk aimed to combine his academic work with political activism in a role he described as a 'citizen-pilgrim'. .[2]

The essential inquiry of a citizen-pilgrim is to discover how to make desirable, yet unlikely, social movements succeed. The movements against slavery, colonialism, racial discrimination, and patriarchy are some instances. My overriding concern is to foster an abolitionist movement against war and aggression as social institutions, which implies the gradual construction of a new world order that assures basic human needs of all people, that safeguards the environment, that protects the fundamental human rights of all individuals and groups without encroaching upon the precarious resources of cultural diversity, and that works toward the non-violent resolution of intersocietal conflicts..[2]

Falk is Chair of the Board of the Nuclear Age Peace Foundation.[23][24] He is on the advisory board of Faculty for Israeli-Palestinian Peace-USA (FFIPP-USA), a group that describes itself as "working for an end of the Israeli occupation of Palestinian territories and just peace";[25] it calls for "international sanctions" against Israel while saying "academics should think carefully before developing research links and exchanges with Israelis [by] ascertaining whether they are part of the military machine or work to sustain the occupation".[26]

United Nations Human Rights Inquiry Commission for the Palestinian territories[edit]

In 2001 Falk served on a United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) Inquiry Commission for the Palestinian territories[30] with John Dugard, a South African based in Leiden University in the Netherlands, and Kamal Hussein, former foreign minister of Bangladesh. Falk stated the two main issues were: "One is evaluating whether the conditions of occupation are such as to give the Palestinians some kind of right of resistance. And if they have that right, then what are the limits to that right?" and "The other issue at stake in this current inquiry is to evaluate how Israel as the occupying power is carrying out its responsibility to protect the society that is subject to its control."[31] After its investigation the commission issued a report entitled "Question of the violation of human rights in the occupied Arab territories, including Palestine".[32]

The appointment of Falk was reached through a consensus decision by the 47 members of the UN's Human Rights Council. Despite attempts from Jewish groups to persuade the EU and Canada to publicly oppose the appointment the EU remained silent, while Canada chose not to oppose the consensus, instead issuing a statement distancing itself from the choice.[35]

According to a UN press release, then Israeli Ambassador to the United Nations Itzhak Levanon[36] strongly criticized the appointment stating that Falk had written in an article that it was not "an irresponsible overstatement to associate the treatment of Palestinians with the criminalized Nazi record of collective atrocity", arguing that "someone who had publicly and repeatedly stated such views could not possibly be considered independent, impartial or objective".[37] According to the The Jewish Daily Forward Falk actually said: "Is it an irresponsible overstatement to associate the treatment of Palestinians with this criminalized Nazi record of collective atrocity? I think not."[38] Levanon further stated that, "He has taken part in a UN fact-finding mission which determined that suicide bombings were a valid method of 'struggle'. He has disturbingly charged Israel with 'genocidal tendencies', and accused it of trying to achieve security through 'state terrorism'. Someone who has publicly and repeatedly stated such views cannot possibly be considered independent, impartial or objective."[39] The Israeli government announced it would deny Falk a visa to Israel, the West Bank and the Gaza Strip, at least until the September 2008 meeting of the Human Rights Council.[40]

The UN press release reported that the Palestinian representative, Mohammad Abu-Koash, said that it was "ironic that Israel which claimed to be representing Jews everywhere was campaigning against a Jewish professor who had been nominated for the post of Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in the Occupied Palestinian Territory.'" The Palestinian statement went on to refer to Falk as the "author of 54 books on international law", concluding that his appointment was "a victory for good sense and human rights, as he was a highly qualified rapporteur."[41]

Former United States Ambassador to the United Nations, John Bolton, criticized Falk's appointment to the United Nations Human Rights Council, stating that "This is exactly why we voted against the new human rights council", and that "He was picked for a reason, and the reason is not to have an objective assessment — the objective is to find more ammunition to go after Israel."[42]

In May 2008 Israel refused to admit Falk to gather information for a report. The National Lawyers Guild urged Israel to permit Falk entry, stating "Falk made no claims any different from those made by John Dugard, the man he was to replace, in several reports on conditions in the Occupied Territories."[43]Human Rights Watch issued a statement asking Israel to reverse its expulsion of Falk from the West Bank and the Gaza Strip.[44] In a July 2008 interview Falk stated the constraints would "limit my exposure to the direct realities. But I think it's quite possible to perform this role without that exposure. Barring my entry complicates my task but doesn't make it undoable."[45]

In June 2008, Falk proposed to the Human Rights Council that his mandate to investigate violations of international humanitarian law in the Palestinian territories be extended to include possible Palestinian infringements. He stated his goal was to "insulate" the Council, which is dominated by Islamic and African states, usually supported by China, Cuba and Russia, "from those who contend that its work is tainted by partisan politics".[46]

On December 9, 2008, the United Nations released a statement by Falk in his official capacity as "Special Rapporteur" noting that United Nations Secretary-GeneralBan Ki-moon, General Assembly President Miguel D’Escoto and UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Navi Pillay, among other top officials, have expressed concern for the "desperate plight" of civilians in Gaza. Falk said: "And still Israel maintains its Gaza siege in its full fury, allowing only barely enough food and fuel to enter to stave off mass famine and disease." He outlined steps that must be taken to avoid a "humanitarian catastrophe"[47] These included implementing the "responsibility to protect" a civilian population from collective punishment and a determination of "whether the Israeli civilian leaders and military commanders responsible for the Gaza siege should be indicted and prosecuted for violations of international criminal law", which The Jerusalem Post wrote would go before the International Court of Justice at The Hague.[48][49]

On December 14 Falk landed at Ben Gurion Airport with staff members from the UN Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights on an official visit, planning to travel to the West Bank and Gaza to prepare a report on Israel's compliance with human rights standards and international humanitarian law.[50][51][52][53] In an interview Falk stated the Israeli government distorts his real views and that he saw the expulsion as an "insidious pattern of trying to shift the attention from their objections to the person."[54] Pillay called Israel's detention and expulsion of Falk as "unprecedented and deeply regrettable".[55] As of March 2011 Falk was still denied entry into and effectively banned from Israel.[56]

On December 27, 2008 Falk issued a statement condemning the December 2008 Israel strikes on Gaza as "war crimes" because he claims they included collective punishment, targeting of civilians and a disproportionate military response to Hamas rocket attacks on Israel, which also targeted civilians. He stated that Israel had ignored Hamas' diplomatic initiatives to re-establish the ceasefire which expired December 26 and condemned nations which provided Israel military support and participated in the siege of Gaza.[57] In a Houston Chronicle article Falk reaffirmed that he had "called on the International Criminal Court" to investigate Israeli leaders responsible for possible violations of international criminal law.[58]

In March 2009, Falk stated that Israel's offensive in Gaza constituted a war crime of the "greatest magnitude". He called for an independent group to be set up to investigate the war crimes committed on both sides.[59] The British government responded to Falk's report by stating that "the report of the UN Human Rights Council's Special Rapporteur is unbalanced and contributes little."[60] In October 2009 Falk endorsed the United Nations Fact Finding Mission on the Gaza Conflict (also known as the "Goldstone Report") as "an historic contribution to the Palestinian struggle for justice, an impeccable documentation of a crucial chapter in their victimization under occupation".[61]

In his August 10, 2010 UN Special Rapporteur report Falk detailed the accusation that Israel was practicing a policy of apartheid in the Palestinian territories:

"Among the salient apartheid features of the Israeli occupation are the following: preferential citizenship, visitation and residence laws and practices that prevent Palestinians who reside in the West Bank or Gaza from reclaiming their property or from acquiring Israeli citizenship, as contrasted to a Jewish right of return that entitles Jews anywhere in the world with no prior tie to Israel to visit, reside and become Israeli citizens; differential laws in the West Bank and East Jerusalem favouring Jewish settlers who are subject to Israeli civilian law and constitutional protection, as opposed to Palestinian residents, who are governed by military administration; dual and discriminatory arrangements for movement in the West Bank and to and from Jerusalem; discriminatory policies on land ownership, tenure and use; extensive burdening of Palestinian movement, including checkpoints applying differential limitations on Palestinians and on Israeli settlers, and onerous permit and identification requirements imposed only on Palestinians; punitive house demolitions, expulsions and restrictions on entry and exit from all three parts of the Occupied Palestinian Territories."[62][63]

In 2011 Falk spoke to the UN Human Rights Council and stated that Israeli policies in Jerusalem amounted to "ethnic cleansing" against the Palestinian population. He urged the Council to ask the International Court of Justice to investigate Israel for acts of "colonialism, apartheid, and ethnic cleansing inconsistent with international humanitarian law" committed during its occupation of the Palestinian territories.[64]

Falk's report to the UN Human Rights Council focused on Israel’s treatment of Palestinian prisoners and recommended that The International Court of Justice at the Hague should be asked to issue an advisory opinion on Israel’s treatment of prisoners, an opinion which might also cover Israel’s "prolonged occupation" of Palestinian territory. His report also asked the Human Rights Council to censure Israel because of its use of administrative detention, take "emergency notice" of Israeli legislative attempts to legalize West Bank settlements, and to increase attention on Israel’s refusal to cooperate with his work. He stated that Israeli military retaliation for rocket fire from Gaza was not justified. The US Ambassador to the UN Human Rights Council said the US "continues to be deeply troubled by this council’s biased and disproportionate focus on Israel."[65]

In Falk's report to the U.N. General Assembly he recommended that "businesses highlighted in the report – as well as the many other businesses that are profiting from the Israeli settlement enterprise – should be boycotted until they bring their operations into line with international human rights and humanitarian law and standards." He specifically named the United States' Caterpillar Inc., Hewlett-Packard and Motorola; Israel's Ahava, Elbit Systems and Mehadrin; Sweden's Volvo Group and Assa Abloy ; France's Veolia Environment; United Kingdom's G4S, Belgium's Dexia Group, Netherlands' Riwal Holding Group and Mexico's Cemex.[66] At a news conference Falk said: "The focus on business activities is partly an expression of frustration about the inability to obtain compliance with these fundamental legal obligations of Israel and the ineffectiveness of the U.N. efforts to condemn settlement expansion." He also stated "The whole issue of Palestinian self-determination is at risk here."[67]

The report drew criticism from the United States Ambassador to the UN, Susan Rice, who called it "irresponsible and unacceptable",[5][6] and the Canadian foreign ministry which called it "biased and disgraceful" and called on Falk to withdraw his "offensive" report or resign from his UN post.[68] The Israeli Mission to the UN stated that "while he [Falk] spends pages and pages attacking Israel, Falk fails to mention even once the horrific human rights violations and ongoing terrorist attacks by Hamas."[69] Caterpillar Inc. called the report inaccurate and misleading, reflecting his "personal and negative opinions toward Israel". Hewlett Packard said that Falk was "far from an independent and unbiased expert in this matter."[5] Several countries, including Egypt and Iran, called the report fair and balanced.[68]

In December Falk visited the region and the Gaza Strip with the "initial purpose assessing the overall impact of Israel’s prolonged occupation and blockade" against Gaza. However, after Israel's November seven day "Operation Pillar of Defense" military actions against Hamas, Falk claimed "there arose an urgent need to investigate Israel’s seemingly deliberate attacks against civilian targets." After visiting Palestinian survivors of military attacks, Falk stated that "some attacks killed and harmed civilians in a grossly disproportionate manner and thus appear to violate international law." He called today on Israel "to abide by and fully implement the cease fire agreement" and called on the international agreement to make sure it did so.[70]

Richard Falk's annual report, delivered to the UN Human Rights council on June 9, 2013, called for an international investigation into Israeli treatment of Palestinian prisoners. The report criticised the use of arbitrary detention, torture and coerced confessions stating that, "The treatment of thousands of Palestinians detained or imprisoned by Israel continues to be extremely worrisome". Falk said that Israel currently holds 5,000 Palestinians in custody and has imprisoned 750,000 since the start of the occupation. Falk also criticized and called for an end to Israel's blockade of Gaza, saying that it amounted to the "collective punishment of 1.75 million Palestinians." He argued that viability of Gaza was at stake, "With 70 percent of the population dependent on international aid for survival and 90 percent of the water unfit for human consumption, drastic and urgent changes are urgently required if Palestinians in Gaza are to have their most basic rights protected."[71][72]

Falk also called for the Red Cross or a commission of international law experts to establish a convention to address the specific issues related to situations of prolonged occupation. He said that "Forty-six years ago today Israel's occupation of Palestine began. Six days of war has turned into 46 years of occupation", concluding, "Forty-six years of denying Palestinians their most basic rights has not achieved peace, Israel’s continuous annexation of Palestinian resources and territory."[71][72] Additionally, Falk wrote that the commission to investigation UN Watch which he accused of conducting "a smear campaign" by issuing "a series of defamatory attacks demeaning his character, repeatedly distorting his views on potentially inflammatory issues."[73][74]

Many countries speaking at the session thanked Falk for his work and challenged Israel for refusing to cooperate with his human rights mission in the Palestinian territories.[74] The Palestinian delegation praised the report and called for its speedy implementation. The European Union agreed that Israel's settlements and separation barrier were "illegal under international law and constitute an obstacle to peace," but also criticised parts of the report.[71] The European representative said "The EU continues to regret the unbalanced mandate of the Special Rapporteur and is also concerned that parts of the report include political considerations. In the past, the EU emphasized that future reports should be based on a more factual and legal analysis, and we regret to see no genuine progress in that direction. The council needs to be provided with accurate, factual information and solid allegations to fulfill its role and address the human rights situation in occupied Palestinian territory." The United States Ambassador to the UNHRC, Eileen Donahoe, called for Falk's resignation, saying "Falk's attack on UN Watch threatens the independent voice of civil society at the UN. NGO work is particularly important in the field of human rights. Mr. Falk's most recent statement – which he dramatically and recklessly included in an official UN document – is characteristic of previous reprehensible comments and actions he has made during his tenure as a special rapporteur. His views and behavior, both official and unofficial, are offensive and provocative and do nothing to advance peace in the Middle East or to further the protection and promotion of human rights. We again call for his resignation."[74]

In October, 1973, Falk defended Karleton Armstrong, who pleaded guilty to bombing the University of Wisconsin Army Mathematics Research Center, which killed a researcher working there and injured another four people. The New York Times reported that Falk "appealed for full amnesty for all resistors, including those who use violent tactics to oppose the war in Vietnam." The Times further reported that Falk, "cited the Nuremberg Trials as precedent for defense assertions that private American citizens had 'a right, and perhaps a duty' to actively oppose the war by any means".[75] According to Ronald Christenson, political science professor at Gustavus Adolphus College, Falk "invoked the Nuremberg precedent to argue that there is a right of individuals to stop crime 'even by creating a lesser crime'".[76][77]

In early 1979, when Falk was a professor of International Law at Princeton, he visited Iranian Revolution leader AyatollahRuhollah Khomeini at his home in exile in France.[78] In a February 1979 New York Times op-ed, after Khomeini had returned to Iran, Falk wrote, "The depiction of him as fanatical, reactionary and the bearer of crude prejudices seems certainly and happily false."[42] Falk wrote that Khomeini's "entourage was uniformly composed of moderate, progressive individuals,"[79] and that "having created a new model of popular revolution based, for the most part, on nonviolent tactics, Iran may yet provide us with a desperately-needed model of humane governance for a third-world country."[80] By the end of 1979 Khomeini had become Supreme Leader of Iran and began removing moderates from his circles, arresting and even killing political opponents, and supporting students who took over the U.S. embassy in Tehran, holding American hostages for 444 days. Falk was criticized for having supported Khomeini.[79][81] Falk later changed his opinion of Khomeini's regime, calling it "the most terroristic since Hitler."[79]

In November 2008, Falk wrote in The Journal, a student publication in Edinburgh, Scotland: "It is not paranoid under such circumstances to assume that the established elites of the American governmental structure have something to hide and much to explain... The persisting inability to resolve this fundamental controversy about 9/11 subtly taints the legitimacy of the American government. It can only be removed by a willingness, however belated, to reconstruct the truth of that day, and to reveal the story behind its prolonged suppression."[84][85]

In 2004 Falk signed a statement released by the organization 9/11 Truth that calls for a new investigation into the September 11 attacks. Falk confirmed his support for the statement in 2009.[86] In 2008 Falk called for an official commission to further study these issues, including the role neoconservatives may have played in the attacks, saying "It is possibly true that especially the neoconservatives thought there was a situation in the country and in the world where something had to happen to wake up the American people. Whether they are innocent about the contention that they made that something happen or not, I don't think we can answer definitively at this point."[42]

In January 2011 Susan Rice, the United States Ambassador to the United Nations, suggested that Falk should be removed from his U.N. posts after he wrote on his blog about the "eerie silence of the mainstream media, unwilling to acknowledge the well-evidenced doubts about the official version of the events: an al Qaeda operation with no foreknowledge by government officials."[87][88] United Nations secretary-general Ban Ki-moon likewise condemned Falk's blog posting,[89][90] calling it "inflammatory rhetoric" which was "preposterous" and "an affront to the memory of the more than 3,000 people who died in that tragic terrorist attack." Ban stated that only the U.N. Human Rights Council could remove its appointees from office.[91]

In a 2002 op-ed in The Nation, Falk was highly critical of Operation Defensive Shield, describing it as "state-sponsored terrorism". He wrote that the view of an "overwhelming majority" of the UN Security Council, and a UN Human Rights Commission inquiry he was a part of, was that suicide bombings took place only after the Palestinians "ran out of military options", and suicide attacks appeared as the only way to inflict sufficient harm on Israel so that "the struggle could go on". The UN inquiries found that Israel was responsible for the escalation of violence, and that their military response against the Palestinians constituted a violation of international law. Falk referred to the Passover massacre as "horrifying", stating that Israel's response was "equally horrifying".[92]

In 2002 Falk wrote on Princeton Divestment's website that "to divest from companies profiting from business with Israel at this time is to express solidarity with victims of massive crimes against humanity and to call upon Israel to respect U.N. authority and the elemental rules of international law by withdrawing from occupied Palestinian territory."[93]

In a June 2007 article, "Slouching toward a Palestinian Holocaust", Falk compared some Israeli policies with regard to the Palestinians to the Nazi record of collective punishment, warning that Israel may be planning a Holocaust in the same way Nazi Germany did. Identifying himself as a Jewish American, Falk stated that his use of the term 'Holocaust' "represents a rather desperate appeal to the governments of the world and to international public opinion to act urgently to prevent these current [Israeli] genocidal tendencies from culminating in a collective tragedy [for the Palestinians]". Falk also stated that "the comparison should not be viewed as literal, but... that a pattern of criminality associated with Israeli policies in Gaza has actually been supported by the leading democracies of the 21st century." Falk argued that Western and Arab states were associated in a "pattern of criminality" akin to states which let Hitler oppress German Jews in the 1930s. He also denied that Hamas was a terrorist organization and that it was always ready to work with other Palestinian groups towards "acceptance of Israel's existence", called Israel's disengagement from Gaza a "sham" in which 300 Gazans were killed since Israel's "supposed physical departure", and stated that Israel's blockade of the Gaza Strip had brought Gaza to "the brink of collective starvation, imposing a "sub-human existence on a people" through "collective punishment, and that Israeli policies were "indeed genocidal".[7] In late December 2009, Falk again criticized Israel's blockade, and called for Israel to be threatened with economic sanctions if the blockade was not lifted.[94]

In April 2008 Falk compared Israeli actions in Gaza to those of the Nazis and responded to criticism of his statements saying, "If this kind of situation had existed for instance in the manner in which China was dealing with Tibet or the Sudanese government was dealing with Darfur, I think there would be no reluctance to make that comparison." He attributed the reluctance to criticise Israel's policies to the sensitive history of the Jewish people, as well as the state's ability to "avoid having (its) policies held up to international law and morality".[95]

In December 2012, when asked explicitly about the "neutrality" of groups like Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch, Falk said in an interview "there is no doubt that the private-funding base of these leading human rights NGOs leads to some biasing of their agendas". However, he commented that "in reaction to criticism there has been more self-criticism directed at American patterns of abuse, and a greater willingness to report critically on Israel" by such NGOs.[96]

During the 2011 Libyan civil war, Falk published an op-ed in Al Jazeera against the proposals for military intervention. Falk wrote that military intervention was illegal under international law, and that "the Gaddafi government, however distasteful on humanitarian grounds, remains the lawful diplomatic representative of a sovereign state". Falk also wrote that any intervention would be pro-insurgency rather than counter-insurgency, and criticized politicians who supported intervention, arguing that "it seems that many of the Republicans focused on the deficit although cutting public expenditures punishes the poor at a time of widespread unemployment and home foreclosures would not mind ponying up countless billions to finance acts of war in Libya".[97]

In a Falk blog entry published in Today's Zaman, Falk argued that unlike protests in other countries, the Libyan opposition was reliant on military force "almost from the start", and that violent political reaction from within to Gaddafi’s regime was fully justified as an "expression of Libyan self-determination". He also wrote that the intervention was not to protect civilians from attack, but to ensure a rebel victory and the defeat of Gaddafi.[98]

In a posting on his personal blog called "A Commentary on the Marathon Murders", reprinted in Al-Jazeera, Falk wrote regarding the Boston Marathon bombings, which he called "horrific bombings". He also wrote that "the American global domination project is bound to generate all kinds of resistance in the post-colonial world" and that "the United States has been fortunate not to experience worse blowbacks". He contrasted the critical response to the bombings from callers to a PBS program with that of US politicians and the mainstream media among whom he said self-scrutiny remained "taboo" and that American politicians did not "have the courage to connect some of these dots." He also criticized American policy towards Iran’s nuclear program and friendship with Israel, writing more attacks are likely "if there is no disposition to rethink US relations to others in the world, starting with the Middle East."[99][100]

Falk continued and mounted a critique of US foreign policy describing the Iraq War and Afghanistan War as "unlawful wars" which had "devastated two countries, seemingly beyond foreseeable recovery, while adding nothing to American security". He said that while the failure and expense of these wars meant that this kind of intervention was no longer the centerpiece of American policy, "[t]he war drums are beating at this moment in relation to both North Korea and Iran, and as long as Tel Aviv has the compliant ear of the American political establishment, those who wish for peace and justice in the world should not rest easy."

Canadian Foreign MinisterJohn Baird sharply criticized Falk, stating that “Once again, United Nations official Richard Falk has spewed more mean-spirited, anti-Semitic rhetoric, this time blaming the attacks in Boston on President Obama and the State of Israel. The United Nations should be ashamed to even be associated with such an individual.” The United Kingdom, in a statement by its UN mission, noted that this was "the third time we have had cause to express our concerns about Mr. Falk’s anti-Semitic remarks. It is important to the U.K. that special rapporteurs uphold the highest standards in their work and we have twice previously made clear that remarks by Mr. Falk were unacceptable." United Nations Secretary General Ban Ki-moon rejected Falk’s statements, saying that they undermined the credibility and work of the UN.[101]United States Ambassador to the United NationsSusan Rice wrote that she was "Outraged by Richard Falk's highly offensive Boston comments", that "Someone who spews such vitriol has no place at the UN", and that it was "Past time for him to go.".[102]

Jeremy R. Hammond, who had reprinted Falk's article in his online journal, stated that the accusations arose from distortions in the original accusations made by what he called the 'Zionist organization UN Watch', affirming that nowhere in the article does Falk justify the Boston terror attack, as was claimed, and that nowhere did he blame Israel for the attack. He draws a long list of news reports which he argues picked up the UN Watch document's claims and parroted them 'to manufacture a sensational headline,' and attack an 'honourable man'.[111]

looked at from outside of the self-justifying perspective of the United States government, everything Richard Falk says is accurate. However, from the inside of the official government worldview, Falk is a heretic and his message dangerous verbal poison. Therefore, the reaction of those dedicated to customary policies and alliances has been shrill.[112]

On June 29, 2011 Richard Falk posted on his blog an entry regarding the International Criminal Court’s indictment of Muammar Gaddafi for crimes against humanity which included a cartoon image of a dog with a Jewish head-covering and a sweater with the letters "USA"; it was urinating on Lady Justice while devouring bloody human bones.[113]UN Watch, which is a Geneva based NGO[114][115] contacted UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Navi Pillay regarding the cartoon. Falk acknowledged on July 6 that the cartoon was antisemitic and apologized for posting it, adding that "we must also make peace with nature, and treat animals with as much respect as possible." [113][116][117]

Abraham H. Foxman of the Anti-Defamation League called on Falk to resign as U.N. Rapporteur for the Palestinian territories saying that "This cartoon is blatantly anti-Semitic and conveys the message that Jews and Americans care little about what is just and moral" and that "the message of hatred in this cartoon nonetheless directly contravenes the principles of the Human Rights Council and of the United Nations itself."[118]United States envoy to the UN Joseph M. Torsella said the posting of the cartoon was "shameful and outrageous" and "an embarrassment to the United Nations", and called on him to resign.[119][120] US Representative Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, chairwoman of the US House of RepresentativesCommittee on Foreign Affairs also called on Falk to resign.[121] British Prime Minister, David Cameron, instructed the UK's concerns Permanent Representative to express concerns regarding the cartoon and said that he would "continue to closely watch any further actions or comments Mr Falk may make."[122]

In July 2012, in discussing why he was drawn to the "Palestinian struggle", Falk wrote on his blog, "I formed a well-evidence belief that the U.S. Government and the organized Jewish community were responsible for the massive and enduring confiscation of Palestinian land and rights."[123] UN Watch, accused Falk of "promoting racist remarks," as well as anti-Semitism, "by attempting to blame Jewish communities everywhere for alleged crimes against Palestinians."[124] Falk later responded, writing "I have often opposed policies including those of the US and Israel but to conflate such stands with racism is [part of] a wide-ranging and frequently repeated denunciation of my views and activities."[123][125]

In December 2012, UN Watch published an open letter to Human Rights Watch critical of Falk. Falk was asked to resign from the Santa Monica group’s board and his name was removed from their website, because his working for the United Nations was contrary to HRW policy.[126][127][128] Later that month, in response to a UN Watch press release criticizing Falk, 40 representatives of major international human rights organisations worldwide signed a letter to Human Rights Watch urging the group to "clarify that he was not 'expelled' as an enemy of human rights' as UN Watch claimed".[129][130]Phyllis Bennis, a signer of the letter, wrote that Human Rights Watch replied on January 1, 2013, stating that the UN Watch letter was filled with "inaccuracies and falsehoods" and repeating Human Rights Watch's statement it was complying with its longstanding policy.[129][131]

In response to Falk's comments regarding the Boston Marathon bombings, the British mission to the United Nations stated that “[this is] the third time we have had cause to express our concerns about Mr. Falk’s anti-Semitic remarks. It is important to the U.K. that special rapporteurs uphold the highest standards in their work and we have twice previously made clear that remarks by Mr. Falk were unacceptable.”[101]

Toward a Theory of War Prevention, with Saul H. Mendlovitz, Transaction Publishers, 1966

Strategy of World Order (Volumes I to IV), edited with Saul H. Mendlovitz, World Law Fund, 1966–67

Legal Order In A Violent World, Princeton University Press, 1968

International Law And Organization, Editor with Wolfram F. Hanrieder, Lippincott, 1968.

The Six Legal Dimensions of the Vietnam War, Princeton University Press, 1968

In the Name of America-The Conduct of the War in Vietnam by the Armed Forces of the U.S., editor with Seymour Melman, E.P. Dutton, 1968

The Vietnam war and international law, edited by Richard A. Falk with Wolfram F. Hanrieder; J. B. Lippincott, 1968.

A Global Approach to National Policy, Harvard University Press, 1975.

Crimes of War: A Legal, Political-Documentary, and Psychological Inquiry into the Responsibility of Leaders, Citizens, and Soldiers for Criminal Acts in Wars with Gabriel Kolko, Robert Jay Lifton; Random House, 1971

The United Nations and a Just World Order with Samuel S. Kim, Saul H. Mendlovitz; Westview Press, 1991

^ abRichard Falk, On Jewish Identity, Falk blog entry, January 15, 2011:'In my case I have at various times been inspired and enlightened by the practices and wisdom of Christian, Buddhist, Islamic, Hindu, Taoist, and indigenous peoples. And in a more mundane sense, I think that the future of humanity will be greatly enhanced if these various religious and wisdom traditions are ecumenically and inclusively embraced by more and more people throughout the world, providing a thickening societal and civilizational fiber for human solidarity. this sense, I want to say, yes I am Jewish, and proud of it, but I am equally indigenous, Sufi, Hindu, Buddhist, Muslim, and Christian to the extent that I allow myself to participate in their rituals, partake of their sacred texts, and seek and avail myself of the opportunity to sit at the feet of their masters.'

United Nations Special Rapporteurs bear mandates from the United Nations Human Rights Council and may hold the titles Special Rapporteur, Independent Expert or Special Representative of the Secretary-General, and are also referred to simply as mandate-holders